Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Fri, 03 November 2000, "gbicket" wrote: > > Javier, > > There are a variety of reasons you hear about flaws in the 24 mm R: > <SNIP> > Maybe the shorter focal length focusing > challenge, combined with its slower f2.8 speed when used with dimmer > viewfinders has produced a higher percentage of unacceptable shots. > <more SNIPped> Greg, You've touched on an important point: it's not just how well the lens performs, but how well the camera system (including the photographer) performs that makes a difference. Recalling that the 24 only works with SL2 and later cameras, until the R8 became available the only camera the 24 could be used with that has a really bright viewfinder was the SL2, a relatively scarce camera. Since most people using the 24 have been using R3 through R7 bodies, there have been disproportionate complaints about its performance. Using the 400 f/6.8, I've found it more difficult to focus with the R4s/R4sP than with the SL or R8. If I had only used the 400 with the R4sP I might have concluded that the lens was mediocre at best. The R4sP's viewfinder is fine with more "normal" lenses but for the extremes (wide, close or long) I'll use the SL (or an R8 if I had one). Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/telyt - -------------------------------------------------- Stay in touch with Northwestern and the world. Click http://www.nualumni.com to get your FREE Northwestern StartPage. Customize your own collection of the latest news, sports, stock quotes, and more. Check it out today!